Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2000-02-08 - AGENDA REPORTS - PROP 26 FIX SCHOOLS (2)AGENDA REPORT City Manager Approval Item to be presented b Maria Rountree CONSENT CALENDAR DATE: February 8, 2000 SUBJECT: PROPOSITION 26 "LET'S FIX OUR SCHOOLS INITIATIVE" DEPARTMENT: City Manager RECOMMENDED ACTION Adopt resolution of support. BACKGROUND The League of California Cities has requested that the City of Santa Clarita support Proposition 26. This measure changes the State Constitution to lower the voting requirement for passage of local school bonds from two-thirds to a simple majority (50%+1), to apply only if the local bond measure presented to the voters includes: • A requirement that the bond funds can be used only for construction, rehabilitation, equipping of school facilities, or the acquisition or lease of real property for school facilities; and • A specific list of school projects to be funded and the school board certifies it has evaluated safety, class size reduction, and information technology needs in developing the list; and • A requirement that the school board conduct annual, independent financial and performance audits until all bond funds have been spent to ensure that the bond funds have been used only for the projects listed in the measure. The local school jurisdictions affected by this proposition are K-12 school districts, community college districts, and county boards of education. Since 1996, districts have received state funding to help reduce class sizes to no more than 20 students in primary grades. The funds paid for more teachers, but the facilities were not adequate. Proposition 26 would allow voters to approve the money schools need to accommodate smaller classes. iYo'I'` dups• Item: -9- ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS 1. Oppose Proposition 26. 2. Remain neutral. 3. Other actions as determined by Council. FISCAL IMPACT Impact on state costs is unknown, although there may be longer-term state savings to the extent local school districts assume greater responsibility for funding school facilities. Government fiscal impacts include increased debt costs for local school districts to pay off the bonds, which would vary by individual district. The magnitude of these local costs is unknown, but on a statewide basis could be in the hundreds of millions of dollars annually within a decade. ATTACHMENTS Resolution of support for Proposition 26. Full text of Proposition 26 — available in City Clerk's Reading File. MLR:= S,.\MS\CCAGENDA\2 S 00\CCPRP26.DOC CA Secretary of State - Primary Election 2000 - Text of Proposition 26, Page 1 of 6 Proposition 26 1 Vote 2000 Home I Ballot Pamphlet Home I Next - Prop 271 Secretary of State Home School Facilities. Local Majority Vote. Bonds, Taxes. Initiative Constitutional Amendment and Statute. Text of Proposition 26 This initiative measure is submitted to the people in accordance with the provisions of Section 8 of Article H of the California Constitution. This initiative measure amends the California Constitution and the Education Code; therefore, existing provisions proposed to be deleted are printed in BOLDEWUNDERLINED type and new provisions proposed to be added are printed in italic type to indicate that they are new. PROPOSED LAW THE MAJORITY RULE ACT FOR SMALLER CLASSES, SAFER SCHOOLS, AND FINANCIAL ACCOUNTABILITY SECTION 1. TITLE This act shall be known as the Majority Rule Act for Smaller Classes, Safer Schools, and Financial Accountability. SEC. 2. FINDINGS AND DECLARATIONS The people of the State of California find and declare as follows: (a) Investing in education is crucial if we are to prepare our children for the 21st century. (b) We need to make sure our children have access to the learning tools of the 21st century like computers and the Internet, but most California classrooms do not have access to these technologies. (c) We need to build new classrooms to facilitate class size reduction, so our children can learn basic skills like reading and mathematics in an environment that ensures that California's commitment to class size reduction does not become an empty promise. (d) We need to repair and rebuild our dilapidated schools to ensure that our children learn in a safe and secure environment. (e) Students in public charter schools should be entitled to reasonable access to a safe http://www.ss.ca.gov/vote2000NoterGuide/Propositions/26text.htm 1/31/00 CA Secretary of State - Primary Election 2000 - Text of Proposition 26, Page 2 of 6 and secure learning environment. (f) We need to give local citizens and local parents the ability to build those classrooms by majority vote local elections so each community can decide what is best for its children. (g) We need to ensure accountability so that funds are spent prudently and only as directed by citizens of the community. SEC. 3. PURPOSE AND INTENT In order to prepare our children for the 21st century, to implement class size reduction, to ensure that our children learn in a secure and safe environment, and to ensure that school districts are accountable for prudent and responsible spending for school facilities, the people of the State of California do hereby enact the Majority Rule Act for Smaller Classes, Safer Schools, and Financial Accountability. This measure is intended to accomplish its purposes by amending the California Constitution and the Education Code: (a) To provide an exception to the limitation on ad valorem property taxes and the two- thirds vote requirement to allow school districts, community college districts, and county offices of education to equip our schools for the 21 st century, to provide our children with smaller classes, and to ensure our children's safety by repairing, building, furnishing, and equipping school facilities; (b) To require school district boards, community college boards, and county offices of education to evaluate safety, class size reduction, and information technology needs in developing a list of specific projects to present to the voters; (c) To ensure that before they vote, voters will be given a list of specific projects their bond money will be used for; (d) To require an annual, independent financial audit of the proceeds from the sale of the school facilities bonds until all of the proceeds have been expended for the specified school facilities projects; and (e) To ensure that the proceeds from the sale of school facilities bonds are used for specified school facilities projects only, and not for teacher and administrator salaries and other school operating expenses, by requiring an annual, independent performance audit to ensure that the funds have been expended on specific projects only. SEC. 4. Section 1 of Article XIII A of the California Constitution is amended to read: Section 1. (a) The maximum amount of any ad valorem tax on real property shall not exceed One percent (1%) of the full cash value of such property. The one percent (I%) tax to be collected by the counties and apportioned according to law to the districts within the counties. (b) The limitation provided for in subdivision (a) shall not apply to ad valorem taxes or http://www.ss.ca.gov/vote2000NoterGuide/Propositions/26text.htm 1/31/00 CA Secretary of State - Primary Election 2000 - Text of Proposition 26, Page 3 of 6 special assessments to pay the interest and redemption charges on many indebtedness of the following : (1) Indebtedness approved by the voters prior to July 1, 1978 , or (2) any bonded. #italic#(2) Bonded indebtedness for the acquisition or improvement of real property approved on or after July 1, 1978, by two-thirds of the votes cast by the voters voting on the proposition. (3) Bonded indebtedness incurred by a school district, community college district, or county office of education for the construction, reconstruction, rehabilitation, or replacement of school facilities, including the furnishing and equipping of school facilities, or the acquisition or lease of real property for school facilities, approved by a majority of the voters of the district or county, as appropriate, voting on the proposition on or after the effective date of the measure adding this paragraph. This paragraph shall apply only if the proposition approved by the voters and resulting in the bonded indebtedness includes all of the following accountability requirements: #italic#(A) A requirement that the proceeds from the sale of the bonds be used only for the purposes specified in this paragraph, and not for any other purpose, including teacher and administrator salaries and other school operating expenses. #italic#(B) A list of the specific school facilities projects to be funded and certification that the school district board, community college board, or county office of education has evaluated safety, class size reduction, and information technology needs in developing that list. #italic#(C) A requirement that the school district board, community college board, or county office of education conduct an annual, independent performance audit to ensure that the funds have been expended only on the specific projects listed. #italic#(D) A requirement that the school district board, community college board, or county office of education conduct an annual, independent financial audit of the proceeds from the sale of the bonds until all of those proceeds have been expended for the school facilities projects. #italic#(c) Notwithstanding any other provisions of law or of this Constitution, school districts, community college districts, and county offices of education may levy a majority vote ad valorem tax pursuant to subdivision (b). SEC. 5. Section 18 of Article XVI of the California Constitution is amended to read: SEC. 18. (a) No county, city, town, township, board of education, or school district, shall incur any indebtedness or liability, in any manner or for any purpose, exceeding in any year the income and revenue provided for such that year, without the assent of unless the indebtedness or liability is approved by two-thirds of the qualified electors thereof, voters of the public entity voting at an election to be held for that purpose, except Drovided that with respect to any such public entity which is authorized to incur indebtedness for public school purposes, any proposition for the incurrence http://www.ss.ca.gov/vote2000NoterGuide/Propositions/26text.htm 1/31/00 CA Secretary of State - Primary Election 2000 - Text of Proposition 26, Page 4 of 6 of indebtedness in the form of general obligation bonds for the purpose of repairing, reconstructing or replacing public school buildings determined, in the manner prescribed by law, to be structurally unsafe for school use, shall be adopted upon the approval of a majority of the qualified electors of the public entity voting on the proposition at such election-, nor unless before or at the time of incurring such the indebtedness provision shall be is made for the collection of an annual tax sufficient to pay the interest on such the indebtedness as it falls due�and also provision to constitute for a sinking fund for the payment of the principal thereof, on or before maturity, which shall not exceed forty 40 years from the time of contracting the same: provided, however, anything to the contrary herein notwithstanding, when indebtedness. #italic#(b) Notwithstanding subdivision (a), on or after the effective date of the measure adding this subdivision, in the case of any school district, community college district, or county office of education, any proposition for the incurrence of indebtedness in the form of general obligation bonds for the construction, reconstruction, rehabilitation, or replacement of school facilities, including the furnishing and equipping of school facilities, or the acquisition or lease of real property for school facilities, shall be adopted upon the approval of a majority of the voters of the district or county, as appropriate, voting on the proposition at an election. This subdivision shall apply only to a proposition for the incurrence of indebtedness in the form of general obligation bonds for the purposes specified in this subdivision if the proposition meets all of the accountability requirements of paragraph (3) of subdivision (b) of Section 1 of Article XIII A. #dtalic#(c) When two or more propositions for incurring any indebtedness or liability are submitted at the same election, the votes cast for and against each proposition shall be counted separately, and when two-thirds or a majority of the qualified electors voters, as the case may be, voting on any one of such those propositions, vote in favor thereof, such the proposition shall be deemed adopted. SEC. 6. Section 47614 of the Education Code is amended to read: 47614. A school district in which a charter school operates shall permit a charter school to use, at no charge. facilities not currently being used by the school district for instructional or administrative purposes, or that have not been historically used for rental purposes provided the charter school shall be responsible for reasonable maintenance of those facilities. (a) The intent of the people in amending this section is that public school facilities should be shared fairly among all public school pupils, including those in charter schools. #italic#(b) Each school district shall make available, to each charter school operating in the school district, facilities sufficient for the charter school to accommodate all of the charter school's in -district students in conditions reasonably equivalent to those in which the students would be accommodated if they were attending other public schools of the district. Facilities provided shall be contiguous, furnished, and equipped, and shall remain the property of the school district. The school district shall make reasonable efforts to provide the charter school with facilities near to where the charter school wishes to locate, and shall not move the charter school unnecessarily. http://www.ss.ca.gov/vote2000NoterGuide/Propositions/26text.htm 1/31/00 CA Secretary of State - Primary Election 2000 - Text of Proposition 26, Page 5 of 6 #italic#(1) The school district may charge the charter school a pro rata share (based on the ratio of space allocated by the school district to the charter school divided by the total space of the district) of those school district facilities costs which the school district pays for with unrestricted general fund revenues. The charter school shall not be otherwise charged for use of the facilities. No school district shall be required to use unrestricted general fund revenues to rent, buy, or lease facilities for charter school students. #italic#(2) Each year, each charter school desiring facilities from a school district in which it is operating shall provide the school district with a reasonable projection of the charter school's average daily classroom attendance by in -district students for the following year. The district shall allocate facilities to the charter school for that following year based upon this projection. If the charter school, during that following year, generates less average daily classroom attendance by in -district students than it projected, the charter school shall reimburse the district for the over -allocated space at rates to be set by the State Board of Education. #italic#(3) Each school district's responsibilities under this section shall take effect on July 1, 2003, or if the school district passes a school bond measure in the years 2000, 2001, or 2002, on the first day of July next following such passage. #italic#(4) Facilities requests based upon projections of fewer than 80 units of average daily classroom attendance for the year may be denied by the school district. #italic#(5) The term "operating, " as used in this section, shall mean either currently providing public education to in -district students, or having identified at least 80 in - district students who are meaningfully interested in enrolling in the charter school for the following year. #italic#(6) The State Department of Education shall propose, and the State Board of Education may adopt, regulations implementing this subdivision, including, but not limited to, defining the terms "average daily classroom attendance, " "conditions reasonably equivalent, " "in -district students, " and 'facilities costs, " as well as defining the procedures and establishing timelines for the request for, reimbursement for, and provision of, facilities. SEC. 7. CONFORMITY The Legislature shall conform all applicable laws to this act. Until the Legislature has done so, any statutes that would be affected by this act shall be deemed to have been conformed with the majority vote requirements of this act. SEC. 8. SEVERABILITY If any of the provisions of this measure or the applicability of any provision of this measure to any person or circumstances shall be found to be unconstitutional or otherwise invalid, such finding shall not affect the remaining provisions or applications of this measure to other persons or circumstances, and to that extent the provisions of http://www.ss.ca.gov/vote2000NoterGuide/Propositions/26text.htm 1/31/00 CA Secretary of State - Primary Election 2000 - Text of Proposition 26, Page 6 of 6 this measure are deemed to be severable. SEC. 9. AMENDMENT Section 6 of this measure may be amended to further its purpose by a bill passed by a majority of the membership of both houses of the Legislature and signed by the Governor, provided that at least 14 days prior to passage in each house, copies of the bill in final form shall be made available by the clerk of each house to the public and the news media. SEC. 10. LIBERAL CONSTRUCTION The provisions of this act shall be liberally construed to effectuate its purposes. Rmposi on_26 I Voto2000Home I all __mI Nexl__Prop,27 ISecretary_of State_Homo http://www.ss.ca.gov/vote2000NoterGuide/Propositions/26text.htm 1/31/00 REC'E'' !E D ANMD MADE A 021 V00 MEETING ITEM N0. 9 9 , a a h! � '.. Two-thirds bond requirement makes sens he decades -old battle to lower the two-thirds vote requirement to a simple majority has resurfaced. Once again, "simple majority" advocates have armed themselves with the familiar battle cry that unless the two-thirds threshold for local school bond measures is reduced, our existing schools will never be repaired and much-needed new schools will never be built. Obviously, the failed lessons of past attempts have gone unlearned. Otherwise, it would be remembered that although Californians are sympathetic toward the needs of their local schools, they also realize these needs can be met without lowering the bar when it comes to raising property taxes. In 1883, California Gov. George Perkins' stern warning against unrestricted taxes moved the Legislature to enact the two-thirds majority vote for all local bond measures. Since then, this protection has withstood two major statewide ballot attempts to reduce it to a simple majority. Most recently, a 1993 initiative appeared on the statewide ballot that proposed to reduce the requirement. The public responded with a resounding no. In fact, returns from the 36th Assembly District clearly report that 78 percent of the voters rejected it. Some like to ignore these facts and continue to argue that without a reduction in the two-thirds requirement, local schools will be imperiled. Some especially like to point to last year's $52 million failed bond measure in the William S. Hart Union High School District as a prime example of the need for lowering the threshold. I supported this bond measure and others like it Guest Commentary because I believe it is important to invest in our local schools. The Santa Claiita Valley has demonstrated this same belief in the past as proven in other successful bond measures. Last year, Measure K, Newhall School District's $35 million bond measure, passed with a two-thirds majority. The same holds true for other communities throughout the entire state. In March and June 1996, 24 of 32 school bonds passed across the state. In November 1995, 15 of 36 passed. Each one was approved with a two-thirds majority. Despite what we sometimes hear, it is not necessary to lower the two-thirds threshold. Rather, it is the job of the school district to educate the community of its school needs in order to gamer the support to pass local school bonds. School bonds lose because they receive too few votes, not because of the two- thirds required majority! Lowering the threshold would mean that a simple majority (50 percent plus one) would be able to determine that a tax be forced upon property owners who generally make up only a minority of voters. These debts are often repaid over a span of 20 to 30 years. This means a new generation of voters (and future homeowners) could look forward to repaying a debt they were too young to vote for in the first place. Common sense tells us that creating su a debt should not be easy to do. We must also remember that !`c school bond measure fails, there : re alternatives. The measure can always appear on the ballot. If it fails again, school districts can look to other fundi: sources. Proposition IA, the record S9 billion statewide bond measure that passed in November 1998, created a balanced system of financing new schools through developer fee le,! general obligation bonds, Mello -Roo bonds and state bonds. It also provide - state money to match local money --- limited dollars that would be wise for school districts to utilize. If a school district is unable to raise its local shar< may request a state hardship grant to build a school. As a last resort, if the runs out of money and cannot fund approved school district projects, sct.,, districts may increase developer ccei finish such projects. We must fight to maintain the n+o- thirds threshold that has protected property owners for over a century. Ti is no reason to eradicate this protectic,. simply as a result of a few failed atter„ to pass school bond measures. Ou: communities have historically proven genuine commitment to their local schools and, when properly infonu c they will continue to pass school bon,. The two-thirds threshold strikes the b_° logical balance between investment in building new schools and protectin taxpayers. Assemblyman Geoige Ranlh'.. Pabndale represents mos,, o rlu- Clarita Valley.